About your Search

20121108
20121116
STATION
MSNBC 39
MSNBCW 38
CSPAN 18
CNN 7
CNNW 7
CSPAN2 7
KNTV (NBC) 3
WBAL (NBC) 3
WRC (NBC) 3
CNBC 2
FBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 145
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 145 (some duplicates have been removed)
next. john boehner signals a new willingness to compromise on immigration while senator mitch mcconnell is losing a few allies but keeping his leadership post. it's friday. we're going to indulge a bit in 2016 speculation. one thing we already know for sure, the first test of the clinton machine is coming up faster than you might think. >>> first, a look ahead at the president's schedule. 1:00 today, those remarks, setting the parameters on the fiscal cliff. this family used capital one venture miles to come home for the holidays. that's double miles you can actually use... sadly, their brother's white christmas just got "blacked out." [ brother ] but it's the family party! really jingles your bells, doesn't it? my gift to you! the capital one venture card! for any flight, any time! that's double miles you can actually use! how illuminating. what's in your wallet? let me guess, am i on the naughty list again? ho ho ho! now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about
of the willingness to work with drawing lines in the dust, we get a different phenomenon. mitch mcconnell took a much harder line, and it really was he has a mandate for his failed policies. that is not what this election was about. anything that happens now asked to meet the approval of the house republicans, or it is not going anywhere. that i think is in many ways also a false bluster, because what we see going on in the senate is riling change that mcconnell does not necessarily control, which is 48 senators from across the board working with the fix that debt coalition and the business community to come up with a simpson-bowles template. there will not be a plan. >> what you see is the scenario for the link up? >> especially on the fiscal cliff? >> you will not see much difference between this on this. mort, i think it is impossible to write serious law during a lame duck that would constitute an agreement with any substance other than, and something set up behind them once again, to go into the fact if the next congress does not actually produce them. but the idea that they could do something t
from mitch mcconnell. he put out a statement. he's still minority leader. he left no doubt republicans will not be cooperating. it reads in part, the voters have not endorsed the failures or excesses of the president's first term. they have simply given him more time to give him the job they asked him to do together with the congress that restored balance. he's basically saying we won, you won. this is going to be a fight. i didn't see a lot of hope in that for negotiation. >> not only that, he started on a very -- hey, don't offer us anything that can't pass the house of representatives. >> what's that mean? >> well, that means we're starting from square one, apparently. john boehner today, he wants to not have any grand bargain before the end of the year. wants to do this -- they're just buying time. it will be interesting -- i'll be curious to see how the white house now reacts. you've got boehner and mcconnell, boehner is playing good cop, seems more conciliatory. mcconnell less so. mcconnell has a political squeeze happening on him because he's up for re-election in 2014. two thin
that was issued by mitch mcconnell, i personally found to be appalling. it was as if he hadn't taken any note of the election result whatsoever, and it spoke more of the continued intrans jens that have marked the last couple of years. in which direction is the gop going to go? the boehner path that's more con sill laer, let's get it done to avert a fiscal cliff or the mcconnell path. i hope it's the former and not the latter. >> you have boehner saying he's open to accept additional revenue. combine that on the other side with mcconnell as michael just pointed out and you have is there still a grover norquist impact, or has that evaporated or gone by the election? does that still exist, that pressure on republicans that sid signed in pledge. >> grover publicly stated that the american people did not vote for an increase in taxes. that they kept republicans in the house and the senate to stop any tax increases. so, of course, the pressure continues. john boehner is dealing tw two tensions. he's trying to explain to his conference they have to increase leverage. they don't want to see a middle
have lost the speakership. whether mitch mcconnell and more adult members of the members the of the senator can put pressure on the house. if they can't change these fundamental dynamics we're headed in the same direction. >> i think mitch mcconnell is the problem because he's headed for re-election. but i think one of the interesting things that boehner said, is this your moment now, mr. president, now leave. that's both the reality and a little bit of trying to pass the buck. but it's the truth. it is going to be up to the president to go into the negotiations and to lead, and continue to listen and find areas where compromise can be built. it is on his shoulders. >> he has to lead publicly as well. >> yes. >> to sell it? >> he has to sell it. you know, there are a couple -- there aren't a lot of republicans i think that play in regards to public pressure, but there are a few. and the president's going to have to work hard, find points of pressure on those people. >> and willing to absorb some blows. >> remember when he ran against hillary clinton and beat her. hillary
or belief that the other side, that would be mitch mcconnell, the senate republican leader, or john boehner, the speaker, are up to a big deal? >> i don't know if he has confidence in boehner and mitch mcconnell but he certainly has confidence at this point in the idea that the american people, the majority of the american people, back the whole idea of tax increases on the wealthy. the white house said pre-election polling and postelection exit polls show that more americans -- chris: how do you put together -- everybody watching has an opinion on that. the very wealthy should pay their share at least and not avoid it. but they also seem to applaud every time either candidate on either said said we got to work together. >> the white house dream would be to see boehner peel away some republicans and work with the democrats in the house on the deal. that's what they want. chris: will paul ryan join john boehner, the speaker, in trying to work out a deal? or he will be a rejectionist and set up the big rebel flag and say i'm going to be the die-hard? >> no one knows the answer to that questio
get a different phenomenon. mitch mcconnell took a much harder line, and it really was he has a mandate for his failed policies. that is not what this election was about. anything that happens now has to meet the approval of the house republicans or it is not going anywhere. that i think is in many ways also a false bluster, because what we see going on in the senate is roiling change that mcconnell does not necessarily control, which is 48 senators from across the board working with the fix-the-debt coalition, and the business community to come up with a simpson-bowles template. there will not be a plan. >> what you see is the scenario? >> especially on the fiscal cliff? >> you will not see much difference between this on this. mort, i think it is impossible to write serious law during a lame duck that would constitute an agreement with any substance other than, and something set up behind them once again, to go into the fact if the next congress does not actually produce them. but the idea that they could do something that delivers on the promise of tax reform, which, when y
mitch mcconnell was the number one obstructionist in the president's first term. now he tells "the wall street journal" he'll do whatever it takes to get a deal. i'd be willing to pay the ransom if e we thought we were going to get the hostage out. but the hostage is what? entitlement spending. mcconnell's intention, he's willing to agree to a dollar of new taxes for every dollar in cuts. what a difference an election makes. >> i'm going to ask a question on the stage. they seau had a real spending cuts deal, 10 to 1. spending cuts to tax increases. spooker, you're already shaking your head. but who on this stage would walk away from that deal? would you raise your hand about not raising taxes. >> remember in 2011 republicans would not take a 10 to 1 tax cut deal? now today mitch mcconnell is willing to do a 1 to 1 deal. republicans lost all of their leverage in this election. they made a big gamble and came up empty handed. in 2011 president obama was cutting deals with john boehner on the golf course. it was very favorable for the republicans. the president agreed to more than $1.2 tr
the sound bites we just say, the video we saw was mitch mcconnell, the republican leader of the senate. he's up in 2014. he's got rand paul, a tea party guy, as his other republican senator in the state. mcconnell's worried about a challenge from the right to the point where he hired rand paul's campaign manager who was ron paul's campaign manager to be his mcconnell campaign manager coming up. so mitch mcconnell is the missing piece of the puzzle here. he's the person the president has had the least success in dealing with. they have no personal relationship whatwhatsoever, th president and john boehner played golf once or twice. boehner as a person is of a more amenable guy. the white house wants a deal, and the reason they want a deal is because of the economy. if we get tangled up here in d.c. and go over the cliff or down the gradual slope, it's not -- it's not going to be good for the economy. there are people waiting to invest. there's a world watching. everybody agrees that if a deal can be cut, economies around the world, not just in america, are going to benefit. >> yeah. i think
mcconnell made the statement about his number one priority to be to deny obama a second term. not that he would think that, but he would say it. two questions -- why do you think it did not get even more play by the dems, and secondly, on the hill, among the republicans, were there people saying why in the world did you say that? it seemed like such an unsmart thing to say to me. >> that was a moment when even i was like, i can't believe he said it, too. but as i recall -- and please correct me -- i am pretty sure he said its suit the conservative crowd, either at the heritage foundation or isn't like that and he may have felt -- obviously it was public and not private -- like the 47% remarks from mitt romney -- he may have felt it would not get much press. >> he did say -- and i am not sure whether the interview was before or after the heritage remarks, but he did tell the press it was his priority. why wouldn't he? the upset party. but it is sort of mystifying that someone who is the consonant operator on capitol hill -- it is hard he spent any time of the capital not to have any respec
with the great. but there's another factor to keep in mind for 2014 are among those who are up in 2014, mitch mcconnell, john cornyn, lindsey graham, saxby chambliss. now, if you're mitch mcconnell and we've been sitting there for years ago we would have had unanimity that niche was keening of the republican party in kentucky. and that was not even a contest for who was the utterly acknowledged leader. and we get to the 2010 elections and he put every resource he could to every attempt, every string he could pull to keep rand paul from winning the republican nomination. and failed mr. luther if your looking at this from mcconnell's perspective, knowing that several other republicans who ran for the senate this time would not promise going in that they would support mitch mcconnell, and you know that you have the potential for a primary challenge at portage and no longer controlled, your willingness to compromise on some of these critical issues may be itself compromised. if you're john cornyn, you would've stayed out of the race for the republican nomination for the senate this time around, but you sat
this morning to a couple of republicans who said some things, [inaudible] mitch mcconnell and leadership could not push for enough amendments for votes on amendments like marriage or repealing health care or guns. republicans will push hard. >> how about six weeks on contraception in the highway bill. is that a pretty good start? do you remember that? >> it looks like there are motions to proceed. do you have any changes -- plans to change the filibuster? >> you ask the question, i am answering it. the rules have been abused and we're going to work to change them. a're going to make the senate meaningful place and we will make it so we can get things done so people who want boats on what you mentioned, six marriage and abortion, the american people are interested in doing something about the staggering debt we have. the election was pretty clear in a number of ways. the president campaigned around the country saying we know what the problems are. we just need some revenue. that was the issue. the mandate was, look at the exit polls and the polling. the vast majority of the american people, ric
will be greater but there's another factor to keep in mind for 2014. among those who are up to 2014, mitch mcconnell, john cornyn, lindsey graham, saxby chambliss. if you are mitch mcconnell and we have been sitting here four years ago we would have had unanimity that mitch was king of the republican party in kentucky and there was not even a -- for the utterly acknowledged leader and then we get to the 2010 elections and he put every resource he could and every attempt, it every string he could pull to keep rand paul from winning the republican nomination and failed miserably. if you are looking at this from mcconnell's perspective knowing that several of the republicans who ran for the senate this time would not promise going in that they would support mitch mcconnell, and you know that you have the potential for a primary challenge and a party you no longer control, your willingness to compromise on some of these critical issues may be itself compromise. if you are john cornyn you would have stayed out of the race in the republican nomination for the senate this time around but you sat back and w
done, much more so than mitch mcconnell, if he can get a deal done in the first six months, he's got health reform and putting the nation's fiscal house in order for the next three, four, five generations as the signature achievement already of his second term, that puts you in the league of some of the most successful presidents in our history. those are huge, big-time -- those are big-time accomplishments. >> he's got the opportunity. >> yes, that's what i'm saying. the door is open for him. >> he is going to have to strike some deals. >> he is. >> and he's going to have to make some grand alliances. >> i don't know anyone who knows speaker boehner who doesn't say a couple of things about him. one, pretty good guy. >> handsome. handsome. >> two, can cut a deal. knows how to cut a deal. and three, from that clip, joe, a guy who knows that he is one of the point people in leading a renewal of the republican party. he's got to cut a deal. he's got to cut a deal. >> but he doesn't have to cut a deal. that's the point and that's what the president and that's what the white house needs t
? the signs aren't clear. mitch mcconnell seemed to be saying no on tuesday, john boehner seemed to be saying possibly. so the issue is are they willing to move to the center on key issues? >> the books are being written but the chapters have yet to be lived out in a second obama term. ron suskin wrote in an op-ed for "the new york times" about whether obama can give the confidence americans need right now, focusing on legacy, which he goes on to say is the end game of the president and is often missing what's happened before his eyes. the great mishap of the first term is failing to direct. with a new president, a sky high approval rating, a sea of enthusiasts. with hindsight 2020, how will obama be different with legacy now in front of his mind? >> i actually think, in terms of legacy, he's going to have the legacy of bringing health care reform, which presidents have tried for a very long time, to fruition here in america, and he made a choice in doing that, and it probably was a choice that cost him some political capital because it came at the expense of some other things he might have d
, the other thing to watch out for is the fact senator mcconnell, normally a kaubs, very cautious politician by nature will look over his shoulder to make sure he doesn't face a tea party challenge. all of that together, i think, makes it a toxic atmosphere and something we will have to all watch carefully. >> now you -- do you believe that the president is giving up leverage if the republicans don't believe he'll go over the cliff? >> yes. >> and you think he has sent a message that he's willing to go over the cliff? >> i think he sent the message and i'm prepared to reiterate that. >> you think the president is willing to go over the cliff? >> i believe that he is prepared -- >> i have not heard that from him. >> you are looking at the fact that come january 1st if there's no agreement taxes will go up on everyone. including the middle class. i think that's a politically unsustainable position. that the republicans are going to come to regret but, yes, you're right. you haven't heard it yet from the president. he needs to keep his flexibility open as we go into these negotiations but i thi
street journal" this weekend, where mcconnell said he's willing to pay the ransom. meaning he's willing to sign off on higher taxes for the wealthy, which obama is demanding. the democrats have the leverage and the republicans recognize that and the republicans will compromise in some way on the tax issue. my issue and question is this. there was a civil war in the republican party the last time republican members of congress voted for a atax hike in 1990 under george bush sr. is this a situation for the next six weeks republican leaders pretend there's no deal coming and pretend they fight it tooth and nail. we get to december 29th and dictator obama forced this on us. is that the game mcconnell and boehner play here? >> i think they know that game won't play well. they have to play it. everyone has to take a sacrifice here, and when you do the numbers with america's finances to keep the entitlements entact, if slightly different from today, to keep social security intact and get the economy back and growing, everyone has to take a little bit of a hit, whether it's the private equity g
deduction. the question for mr. boehner is show us the money. >> mitch mcconnell spoke hours ago sounding not at all like he heard last week's election results. >> the time for the president to lead is now, and that means offering a concrete plan that takes into account the fact that half the congress opposes tax hikes. >> congressman, did the election happen? do i wake or sleep? what is this man talking about? >> well, he's kind of out of it. here is the dilemma he has that really he has got to think about whether he can maintain his leadership position. he could be the next richard mourdock. he's got a tea party group in his state going -- that's going to be after him in the next election. so what he's got to do to try to appease them is totally in conflict with what the leader of the republicans in the senate has to do for the good of the country. and it's an internal conflict and i don't see how he resolves it. >> what you're basically say something what we were discussing in the earlier segment, which is these individuals are out solely to protect themselves rather than the condition
of the deal on the debt ceiling last year. >> it came out of mitch mcconnell's office. harry reid went along with it. mcconnell voted for it. john mccain who is a big critic of the defense part of the sequester, it was he voted for it. paul ryan voted for it. so you know, i'm not saying democrats are blameless here or don't deserve some of the responsibility but the idea that republicans are washing their hands and saying this is a white house ploy is completely wrong. >> bill: i was at the white house friday when president obama came into the east room and made a very short speech. very clear about what his plan is and what he wanted. here's the president with one challenge to members of congress. >> obama: i'm open to compromise. i'm open to new ideas. i'm committed to solving our fiscal challenges. but i refuse to accept any approach that isn't balanced. >> bill: what does he mean by that? >> balanced. he's saying first of all it's not just spending cuts. it has to be revenues as well. second, he's rejecting the j
is the meaning of his election? what were voters saying? mitch mcconnell said this is not a mandate to continue the excesses' of your first term. john boehner seemed more open to the idea of allowing more revenue, the rate increases on fiscal cliff issue. i think the president, and i know his left wing, is certainly holding him to the pledge on the campaign trail that he will let the proper rate expire at the end of the year and intends to hold his own in arguing for that. host: margaret talev, that brings up the mandate question. does he say what george w. bush said, i have political capital and i intend to spend it? guest: if you have it, use it, or what other people say it for you. right now, president obama's game is not to come out of the box, acting takeda, and give republicans -- acting cocky and giving republicans an idea -- a reason to want to stick it to him. he is saying let's get this done. that is what he is serious about, there is no reason to set yourself up as having more leverage than you do. host: margaret talev, and the go to this headline in bloomberg. what does he do on his
. the should be enough to deny president obama a mandate. mitch mcconnell made a statement saying the voters have not endorsed the failures or successes, simply given him more time to finish the job they asked him to do, together with a congress that restored balance to washington after two years of one-party control. now, not so fast. the actual number of votes cast for house seats favored the democrats by a half a million votes. this is no man dade for house republicans, but of course they're trying to swing a big stick again. there's a reason. republicans were able to capture more house seats with a majority of the vote. for example, look at pennsylvania in 2008. take a good look. where is the red? a lot of blue district, right? take a look at pennsylvania in 2012. wow. what happened? there's a lot more red. it's because democratic districts have been jerry mandered into unwinnable seats. you know, those republicans are pretty slick. reliability blue districts in the southwestern and southeastern part of pennsylvania were combined into comfortable red districts. real clear politics report
and the president. speaker boehner said tax hik eshehikes aren't acceptable. senator mcconnell the republican leader in senate said that he won't raise taxes to turn off those spending cuts. if senator mcconnell and speaker boehner don't bend, do you still believe the president should go up to the brink. >> here we are, our country has a tremendous debt and deficit problem. we also have a challenge in making sure that we educate our work force, we need to make sure we care for our veterans who need that care today. we need to have research and we need to be able to compete in a global marketplace, those investments are important. everyone who has looked at this, including the supercommittee that i served on, said we need to have revenue as part of the solution to this problem as well as looking at entitlements and spending cuts. what the missing ingredient is revenue. that's what we face right now. if our republican counterparts can step forward with that revenue piece we'll be able to find a solution. >> and if not, go off a cliff? >> well, clearly, we have the ability between now and the end of th
. and it is the guys in the beltway, john boehner, mitch mcconnell, the leaders reverses the guys outside the beltway. the guys in iowa, rick santorum, the folks in south carolina who gave the primary to newt gingrich. beyond that, i feel -- ever since george of the bush's second term, there has been an anti-establishment reaction within the republican party. they were embarrassed and angry with the bush administration. conservatism turned out to not be what they wanted. they wanted small government conservatism. i think everybody loves to many people into the tea party caldron. but you get the types that are determined to come here and do something against leadership. in ohio, he mentioned he likes the trappings of office, if you will. he mentioned to me, how much leadership can you exert? how much control can you exert over your own conference? given the freshmen. and he said to be, it is not the freshmen. he said it is some of the older members. he did not say who. i would have preferred if he did. that is those who are trying to have perfect scores on these ratings. they are the problem. because
to a generational thing. could either one of them make a deal stick within their caucuses? even if mcconnell and reid both tried to put something together, they have some exotic people on their side. you are absolutely right, and then toss in one more factor. you've got all the dysfunctional capitol hill, and then you have a president that basically has no relationship whatsoever with congress on either side. virtually no interaction with members of congress. wow. >> i don't agree with anything charlie just said. no, i agree with everything he just said. the key may be whether the president shows decisive leadership. i don't think decisive leadership necessarily is what he showed a lot of the time in the first term. not that he did not show any leadership. he did not get his hands really dirty. the public option fight we had, if you send it to may i will sign it. he let nancy pelosi take the lead on the public option, and on a lot of things. we knew what he preferred, but he did not twist arms. he just did not seem to get involved in the details. is he going to do that now? if he does that,
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 145 (some duplicates have been removed)